SUPPORTING STATEMENT: Alphabet does not explicitly prohibit discrimination based on viewpoint or ideology in its written EEO policy.



Alphabet’s lack of a company-wide best practice EEO policy sends mixed signals to company employees and prospective employees and calls into question the extent to which individuals are protected due to inconsistent state policies and the absence of federal protection for partisan activities. Approximately half of Americans live and work in a jurisdiction with no legal protections if their employer takes action against them for their political activities.



Companies with inclusive policies are better able to recruit the most talented employees from a broad labor pool, resolve complaints internally to avoid costly litigation or reputational damage, and minimize employee turnover. Moreover, inclusive policies contribute to more efficient human capital management by eliminating the need to maintain different policies in different locations.



There is ample evidence that individuals with conservative viewpoints may face discrimination at Alphabet.



According to a study that examined the political contributions of Alphabet employees over several election cycles, 90 percent of political donations by Google, YouTube, and other subsidiaries of Alphabet have gone to Democrats.1 From 2004 to 2017, $15 million donated by employees of Google and its related companies went to Democrats, and just $1.6 million went to Republicans.2 In 2016, 94 percent of Alphabet employee donations went to Hillary Clinton.3 This high level of support does not appear to be changing anytime soon, as reports indicate that the top donors from Google pushed 94 percent of their total 2022 political contributions to Democrats.4



Most tellingly, a leaked video following the 2016 presidential election shows Google co founders Larry Page and Sergey Brin alongside several execs, including CEO Sundar Pichai, lamenting the Democrats’ loss and insulting and demeaning voters who did not support Clinton.5



Coupled with the fact that Alphabet has refused previous requests to increase the viewpoint diversity of its board, this type of behavior signals to employees that viewpoint discrimination is condoned if not encouraged at the highest levels.



Presently shareholders are unable to evaluate how Alphabet prevents discrimination towards employees based on their ideology or viewpoint, mitigates employee concerns of potential discrimination, and ensures a respectful and supportive work atmosphere that bolsters employee performance.



Without an inclusive EEO policy, Alphabet may be sacrificing competitive advantages relative to peers while simultaneously increasing company and shareholder exposure to reputational and financial risks.



We recommend that the report evaluate risks including, but not limited to, negative effects on employee hiring and retention, as well as litigation risks from conflicting state and company anti discrimination policies.